Does tragedy actually help gun rights?

In much the same way that World War II got us out of the Depression, it is one of those things that is not wished for, yet the reality of it remains. One should not seek out war in order to bolster a country’s economy, nor should one wish for tragedy in order to bolster their position.

But the question remains, does tragedy benefit the pro gun crowd or the gun control zealots?

If you listen to the liberal mainstream media you are inundated with the self righteous fervor of liberty hating dogma that states that “such and such tragedy” is proof that people cannot be responsible for their own well being and as such shouldn’t have the right to keep and bear arms.

When it comes down to it, that is the only argument the gun control zealots believe in, because after all, they operable word is CONTROL, not gun. The Bloombergs and Feinsteins and Obamas of the world don’t see the issue as guns and no guns, they see it as a matter of being able to control people or having people free to resist.

Where is Bloomberg and Feinstein and the rest of the zealots when this vehicular epidemic is plaguing the nation? Where is the Bloomberg led group, Mayor’s Against Fast Cars or Feinstein and her push for Assault Vehicle Bans…because really, who needs a car that can go faster than 55 miles per hour.

We live in a car culture and it is killing us. To take the zealots logic, the only need you would have for a car that goes over the speed limit is to commit crimes and therefore they should be made illegal.

There are less deaths the slower people go so we should have speed limits of 5 miles per hour…unless your are a public figure or rich enough to pay your way around it.

The galling hypocrisy of these gun control proponents is sickening.

But I am getting off topic. Does gun related tragedies help the gun control zealots?

I say thee nay.

Here’s why; Bloomberg, Obama and their ilk have done a very good job of pulling the wool over the eyes of America, making it seem like they really only want “responsible” gun laws. If a right or two gets infringed during the process, it’s only a small price to pay…”for the children” {gag}.

But when a tragedy strikes and you get windbags like Costas and Whitlock spewing their drivel, the curtain is pulled back and people get a glimpse of the true ugly face of the gun control rabidness.

By licking their lips and salivating over what they think will finally push the scales weighing safety/servitude and risk/liberty in their favor, they reveal themselves for the megalomaniac control freaks they are.

Furthermore, since the sleeping giant that resides in the heart of true Americans (the giant being self reliance and exceptionalism) begins to stir, people are finally seeing that their arguments hold no water.

Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora etc. were gun free zones. Microcosms of the gun control utopia where no law abiding citizen is allowed to have guns. Of course, laws do not stop criminals and as such these gun free zones became killing fields for criminals.

And that is the argument that points to how the aforementioned regrettable tragedies bolsters the argument for the Second Amendment. When gun control is seen in the naked light of day to be completely useless in preventing a criminal from committing a crime, the masses see that they are responsible for their own protection. That when seconds count, police are minutes away. That the police will arrive to arrest the criminal, not to stop the crime.

When tragedy strikes, people realize that when the moment evil is before them, they are alone. Either they can be an unarmed lamb waiting for slaughter, or an armed lion willing to fight tooth and nail to triumph.

Tragedy reminds us that at the moment of truth, we stand alone and our actions will determine our fate.

We need to live in a country where tragedy inducing Gun Free Zone signs are replaced by the above sign. We are Americans, our country was born out self reliance and governance. We would be wise as a nation to remember thus.